Here are the six most-read "Malpractice Consult" columns of 2019 from Brianne Goodwin, JD, RN, and Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"Most people do not wish for their actions to be judged in hindsight; rather, if we are going to be judged, we want to be judged based on what we knew at the time," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"The plaintiff alleged that she notified the urologist of her continuing pain and was told there was nothing wrong," writes Brianne Goodwin, JD, RN.
"In this case, a key component to the defense verdict was the fact that the defendants were able to provide convincing expert testimony regarding the outcome of the decedent’s situation if the diagnosis had been tendered earlier, as argued by the plaintiff," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
The court found that treatment performance was below the standard of care.
"The defense claimed that the patient’s kidney function was intact at the time of the CT scan and that the patient failed to follow up with his urologist," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"Based on their lines of questioning, it was apparent the defendant’s attorney wanted me to sit on the jury and the plaintiff’s attorney did not," writes Urology Times Content Channel Director Richard R. Kerr.
"It is prudent for providers to know the law of the jurisdiction where they practice and any applicable policies surrounding consult and documentation," advises Brianne Goodwin, JD, RN.
A pathologist and three urologists were accused of negligence in the lawsuit.
"As the primary witnesses for the defense, [the treating physicians] did not build credibility, were not likable, and did not take any responsibility for the medical care of the claimant," writes Brianne Goodwin, JD, RN.